ALL of these "government" corporations are in Dunn & Bradstreet. No
corporation is sovereign. Every corporation is beholden to its creator who
is more sovereign than it is.
On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 8:05 PM Don Mashak <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Is LMarch 1933 a typo? Do you mean 1 March 1933?
Can I get the Case Cite reference for US Declared a private Corporation?
Those were my thoughts.
Thank you for your time.
In Liberty,
Don Mashak
The Cynical Patriot
On Wednesday, April 21, 2021, 4:30:05 PM CDT, Charley Dan <
charleydan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Nelson
The best I can figure is is all fraud? LMarch 1933 is the date pointed as
private Corp. did officially lhappened. We know the Supreme Court was
stacked to get it passed. When the Supreme Court caught up It declared:
declared U.S. as a private Corp. They should have declared it
unconstitutional but since U.S. has life, liberty, and property they can be
fraudulent also or commit crimes. When caught the law constutional law
applies. Otherwise American people will tolerate suffering.
They have an oath to the Republic. That means to honor those who love big
government and democracy and those who love small government and liberty.
Knowing full well that democracy. Has crossed the constitution authority
they take out bonds and insurance policies to protect themselves by those
who know the constitution. And call their error. If enough sue the
legislature's will remove their laws.. John Marshall (1801-1835) one of my
favorite chief Justice talks of this in farmers trust v ? lawsuit about
taxes. Hoping United States did not get sued very often. So free citizens
have common law remedy for injury and they get to enslave those that are
scarred, ignorant and whatever other way they can. It appears to me that
ever how it is set up in finding they respect the constitution but we have
been approaching it wrong. I did not keep the code and looking for it that
stars once ones nationality is claimed the court must immediately stop.
Nothing about correcting what they already did. Just stop. I've got this
case where I've stop a trial for adult exploration that never really
happened. The selling of homes. Now I've notified seven crucial people
involved that I'm coming on Friday and time to bring a 88 year old mom home
from being restrained by government from an assisted care home. I believe
and diffidently will find out the power of the constitution.I believe they
will back down. Will find out. I'm not asking for a trial to prove it as
King I'm going to get and bring home another King with a friendship
agreement to liberty. They have been notified to shop. I'll correct it.
Lawsuit is in progress and crimes will be filed shortly. So they play a
double roll and we need to figure out how to separate that. I've found that
declaring article 1, section 8241-2,'etc clause 17 and my nationality
separates the two divisions of the Republic
On Apr 21, 2021, 10:13 -0600, NELSON DICE <nelsondice@xxxxxxxx>, wrote:
Charley,
if the Court is FAKE, then how can the Oath of a Judge, Magistrate, Police
Officer, or Court Administrator be REAL or have teeth?
Please explain what the Oath to "support" the Constitution of the United
States and to this State means.
What exactly does the Oath that is signed cover, govern, impact, or have
any validity towards or to whom?
------------------------------
*From:* administrating-your-public-servants-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <
administrating-your-public-servants-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of
Charley Dan <charleydan@xxxxxxxxx>
*Sent:* Wednesday, April 21, 2021 6:16 AM
*To:* administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <
administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
*Subject:* [administrating-your-public-servants] Re: ok to remove or
cover VIN of personal property?
Forest
what is significant about bills of attainder is everything goverment does
is a bill of attainder. They create rules and regulations against you. They
create a fake court so you never have a trial. The trial is free citizen's
deciding if you caused injury. Not their legislative court. Another
constutional issue that government violates.
On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 10:14 PM Charley Dan <charleydan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Don
Article 1, section 8, clause 17 states; jurisdiction of the United States
is land it purchases. Then goes on and gives specific things they can own.
If they buy other things they own it but do not have jurisdicton. That
clause like many in the constitution is an enumerated right. Meaning it am
applies to everyone. Not your, hands of.
Article 1, section 10, clause 1 a bit more difficult to understand. When
they stole our gold government became a private for-profit Corp.
Congressional record March 1993 vol. 33 and Clearfield Doctrine 1943 back
it up. The problem is pretending to be government and a private business
contacting is fraud. Some would say mafia characteristics
On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 10:00 PM Don Mashak <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Hey Charley....
Can you give everyone the nuts and bolts of government have no
Constitutional Authority....
Just like 2 paragraphs, outlining the logical proof...?
I am just trying to grasp this and make it part of my perspective of
reality.
And is this related to being a "free person", "State National"
Thanks in advance.
Those were my thoughts.
Thank you for your time.
In Liberty,
Don Mashak
The Cynical Patriot
Rt 1 Box 231
Albertville MN 55301
The information contained in this electronic mail transmission is intended
only for the use of the person or entity named above and is privileged and
confidential. Any dissemination, distribution or copying of this
communication other than to the person or entity named above is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please
immediately notify the sender by phone and by replying to this message and
then delete the message and any attachments from your system.
On Tuesday, April 20, 2021, 9:33:02 AM CDT, Charley Dan <
charleydan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
No oath makes them a regular free citizen. Therefore, no government
authority. The authority government has is pure tyranny. They claim it is
contract but they have no constitutional authority for that and their
contracts are not with knowledge, understanding, and willing. So it is not
a contract.
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 11:11 PM Russell Lee <russell.lee.2012@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I'm just curious but if none of those officials have article 6 oaths, how
can they be held accountable for violating a constitution that no citizen
is party to — as I understand it.
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 11:43 PM Charley Dan <charleydan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'm filing claim of financial injury caused by certain people in
goverment......Judge, prosecuting attorney, director of elderly care, and
conservator assigned by the judge. All violating the constitution of a free
citizen.
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 6:40 PM Rick Miller <ricky520057@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
What exactly are you filing w/the AG Charley?
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 3:40 PM Charley Dan <charleydan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Let me try and explain this a bit. I've heard many issues here and it does
not match up with my business dealings with bonds, insurance, and
liability. Does not match up with what I've learnt of late either in the
government process.
The public official has a obligation to the people to perform to a
judicial standard/contract. Wither it is the constitution or legislative
law contract the insurance company is there to settle. Just like many
business contracts that have obligations. To make sure the party full fills
there obligation the other party requires a performance bond. The
performance bond guarantees the obligation is full filled or damage caused
by failure of performance the bond company pays and collects from the
individual who took bond out. Now the obligated is smart he buys an general
or balloon insurance policy to pay if something goes wrong.
Last I heard the state supplies a million dollar insurance for each
officer; and if they want more. They buy it. So when you sue officer it is
the insurance policy to pay. Except instead of suing officer you file with
the AG. When you file with the AG he gives the claim to the insurance
company. Just like a car accident. The insurance company settles the
matter. If you and insurance company can not come to agreement. It's court
time. Now if the policy pays but the damage was greater. The bond company
pays and goes after the person who bought the bond. Usual arrangements are
made to settle over time. Bond agent will sell assets if needed.
That is why I've said; if their is damage we should not go to court but to
AG with our claim. Then to court to settle why or why not the claim is
valid. Like two insurance companies battling it out. I think this will be
much easier but depends on how one states their claim. Mine is
constitutional; supreme law of the land is my claim.
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 2:04 PM brian <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
You search the Public Records Office, under the heading of “Oaths”!
There will be lots of different topics, in the public records, so search
for “Oaths & Affirmations”,
or just “Oaths”, and try “Bonds” too, so you can get their Bond Insurance
info on any public official!
3 Affidavits from 3 different people, on One public official is enough to
get them removed from public duties! Never go alone! Try to go in with at
least 2 other witnesses when dealing with ANY public official, in case you
all need to file an Affidavit into their Public Records Office, then get
some Certified Copies of your published Affidavits of wrong-doings by the
Public Official, and send those Certified Copies of ‘Affidavits of
Harm/Damage’ to their Bond Insurance Company with a ‘Notice of Intent to
Sue’ (make up your own Notice) Joe Q. Public Official for $50,000 for
trespass/harm/damages/making legal determinations absent authority, or you
would settle for the amount of their Bond and forego any court action”!!
It would be much cheaper and easier for the Bond Insurance Company to send
you the $10,000 than to have to go to court and possibly have to pay out
$50,000, plus other court costs, attorney fees, Punitive Damages,
Compensatory Damages, etc, eh?!?
I haven’t tried that, but I have read that on the net, years ago!
Peace, all!
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 16, 2021, at 5:30 PM, J_B <tf4624@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
question is how to get it if the court clerk wont hand it over
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 7:35 PM Russell Lee <russell.lee.2012@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
This might seem off-point but has anyone been checking these public
officers for their oath of office? If they have no oath of office, they're
impersonating a public officer and are liable in their personal capacity.
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 3:44 PM jonbondo@xxxxxxxxx <jonbondo@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
if you auto *was* titled it still is and *ever* registered . even
though not currently.. it belongs to the state and it is *not* household
goods.
the 1817 may be about the man/woman jurisdiction. claim; but i do not
think it includes ones Auto. so i say NO its not your household goods;
you are not safe.. .
if you cover the vin. and you are not in the database.. they may assume
its stolen. or you may have to prove it isn't..
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 9:58 AM veritas ghost <guyettedamien8@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
That the king of England, as sovereign of the nation, is said to be
independent of all, and subject to no one but God: and his crown is stiled
imperial, on purpose to assert that he owes no kind of subjection to any
potentate on earth. No compulsory action can be brought against him, even
in his own courts. That a sovereign, when in a foreign country, is always
considered by civilized nations, as exempt from its jurisdiction,
privileged from arrests, and not subject to its laws. Hence this inference
was drawn, that the court having no jurisdiction over Virginia, all its
process against that state, must be coram non judice, and consequently
void. 1 Vatt.P. 2. 133. 2. Vatt. 158. 1 Blackft. 141. 5 Bac. 450. It was
then observed, that there being no instance in our law books, of any
process against a sovereign, it was proper to consider the rules of law
relative to process against their representatives. [* * *]
That the true reason of the minister's exemption from process is the
independence and sovereignty of the person he represents. And although by
engaging in trade, he may so far divest himself of his public character, as
to subject these goods to attachment, yet in every case where he represents
his master, his property is sacred. But a sovereign cannot subject himself
by implication: he must do it expressly. M'Carty v. Nixon et al, 1 U.S. 77
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Fmaps%2Fsearch%2F1%2BU.S.%2B77%3Fentry%3Dgmail%26source%3Dg&data=04%7C01%7C%7Caef2426a1d6043a96d4508d904cbcd4c%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637546095633348936%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=1YnnPjQl6uZs%2FMCREd611FM4lUGG%2FC2TC6W9ynF0Npk%3D&reserved=0>
(1784)
JOHNSON, J. (the supreme Court of the United States):The right of
jurisdiction is essentially connected to, or rather identified with, the
national sovereignty [We the People! ]. To part with it is to commit a
species of political suicide. In fact, a power to produce its own
annihilation is an absurdity in terms. It is a power as utterly
incommunicable to a political as to a natural person. FLETCHER v. PECK, 10
U.S. 87 (1810)
BARTLEY, C. J. (Supreme Court of Ohio) dissented: There is no tribunal
before which the sovereign can be arraigned, his conduct examined, his
errors and delinquencies detected, those errors corrected, and he punished.
PIQUA STATE BANK OF OHIO v. KNOUP, 6 Ohio St. 342 (1856).
Justice BREWER (Supreme Court of the United States) dissenting: The
government of the United States is one of limited and delegated powers. It
takes nothing from the usages or the former action of European governments,
nor does it take any power by any supposed inherent sovereignty. There is a
great deal of confusion in the use of the word 'sovereignty' by law
writers. Sovereignty or supreme power is in this country vested in the
people, and only in the people. [***] When, therefore, power is exercised
by congress, authority for it must be found in express terms in the
constitution, or in the means necessary or proper for the execution of the
power expressed. If it cannot be thus found, it does not exist. FONG YUE
TING v. UNITED STATES, 149 U.S. 698 (1893)
Law of Nations, Book 2 Article 132: "God has created heaven for himself
and his saints, and has given the earth to mankind, intending it for the
advantage of the poor as well as of the rich. The roads are for their use,
and God has not subjected them to any taxes." [a license is a tax and a
automobile is household goods.]
25 AM JUR (1st) Highways, Sec. 163. "No State government entity has the
power to allow or deny passageon the highways, byways, nor waterways
transporting his vehicles andpersonal property for either recreation or
business, but by being subject only to local regulation i.e., safety,
caution, traffic lights, speed limits, etc. Travel is not a privilege
requiring, licensing, vehicle registration, or forced insurances."
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021, 12:47 AM ejartz <ejartz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Are you a person, is the vin on a motor vehicle or a household good or
consumer good?
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021, 8:23 PM J_B <tf4624@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
? go for it all
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 7:31 PM NELSON DICE <nelsondice@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
I am thinking only cover the ViN if no plates on car and no registration
Get Outlook for Android
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Faka.ms%2FAAb9ysg&data=04%7C01%7C%7Caef2426a1d6043a96d4508d904cbcd4c%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637546095633348936%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=w7dvqpxNsJ8jO%2FOxkUOa80nQIwUSLVdbFhEy0mc3MYI%3D&reserved=0>
------------------------------
*From:* administrating-your-public-servants-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <
administrating-your-public-servants-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Jb
<tf4624@xxxxxxxxx>
*Sent:* Thursday, April 15, 2021 12:39:49 PM
*To:* administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <
administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
*Subject:* [administrating-your-public-servants] Re: ok to remove or
cover VIN of personal property?
It’s legal to cover it
On Apr 15, 2021, at 12:26 PM, NELSON DICE <nelsondice@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
https://law.justia.com/codes/new-jersey/2019/title-2c/section-2c-17-6/
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flaw.justia.com%2Fcodes%2Fnew-jersey%2F2019%2Ftitle-2c%2Fsection-2c-17-6%2F&data=04%7C01%7C%7Caef2426a1d6043a96d4508d904cbcd4c%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637546095633358935%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=DHjL8OxKPWIgBMl3Jhm0wvfb5DGJ1oIoz0ySHhFLSg8%3D&reserved=0>
--
Life in one word--LOVE
--
Life in one word--LOVE
--
Life in one word--LOVE
--
Life in one word--LOVE
--
Life in one word--LOVE
